The Importance of Context
We have now seen two ways in which Calvinists convince others that God is absolutely sovereign in the world. One way is to make bold statements that actually contradict Scripture, such as “God rules as surely on earth as He does in heaven.” Another way is to get Christians to doublethink (a tactic we will continue to observe throughout this book as other theological subjects are discussed). There is yet another method of Calvinist argument beside these two—that is, one in which the Calvinist takes Bible verses out of their context (also known as proof-texting).
A good example of this uncontextualized support is the argument found in Bridges’s first chapter of Trusting God, in which there appears a crucial first-chapter set-up passage:
The sovereignty of God is asserted, either expressly or implicitly, on almost every page of the Bible… We are going to look at many of these passages in later chapters, but for now consider just one:
“Who can speak and have it happen if the Lord has not decreed it? Is it not from the mouth of the Most High that both calamities and good things come? (Lamentations 3:37-38)”
This passage of Scripture offends many people. They find it difficult to accept that both calamities and good things come from God. People often ask the question, “If God is a God of love, how could He allow such a calamity?” But Jesus Himself affirmed God’s sovereignty in calamity when Pilate said to Him, “Don’t you realize I have power either to free you or to crucify you?” Jesus replied, “You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above” (Jn. 19:10-11). Jesus acknowledged God’s sovereignty over His life.xxix
Leaving the question about Pilate’s power for a later chapter (17), let us consider the above quote from Lamentations. When Bridges cites calamities, he means it in the broadest sense of human experience. As a case in point, in his next chapter he appeals to God’s sovereignty as foreordaining all accidents where people are paralyzed from the waist down.xxx Later, while commenting on Ephesians 1:11, he even says:
…God makes all events of history; all the decisions of rulers, kings, and parliaments; and all the actions of their governments, armies, and navies serve His will.xxxi
After reading this statement I cannot help but wonder why Bridges would suppose that God makes all the events of history without needing to be accountable for them? It should not surprise us, then, that those who see no real dilemma in such statements should also see in certain Bible verses doctrines that are not really there. This is what Bridges does with Lamentations 3:37-38 in an attempted tour de force at the beginning of his book. His treatment of these verses is an attempt to prove God’s total and absolute sovereignty at the very outset. But herein lies the problem, for Bridges’s appeal to Lamentations 3:37-38 is never explained against the historic background of Lamentations, i.e., God’s instance of judgment against the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusalem. This theme of judgment, along with the prophet’s response to God’s decision to bring judgment, is dominant throughout the entire book of Lamentations and also through much of Jeremiah.
God’s judgment and Jeremiah’s declamatory mourning are both evident from Lamentations’s first sentence: “How doth the city sit desolate, that was full of people!” Again, this is the dominant theme throughout the book. So, when 3:37 says, “Is it not from the mouth of the Most High that both calamities and good things come?”the calamity in specific view is the instant God speaks judgment upon Jerusalem and Judah (Lam. 3:7). And if a general application ought to be made, then it must implicitly refer to any judgment against a nation that God decides to carry out because of that nation’s sin (see also Is. 29 and 45). The idea that God brings “calamities and good things” in verse 37 hearkens back to Jeremiah 18:3-10, where the prophet is given a picture of God deliberating about whether He will bring destruction or blessing upon a nation:
3Then I went down to the potter’s house, and there he was, making something at the wheel. 4And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter; so he made it again into another vessel, as it seemed good to the potter to make. 5Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying: 6“O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter?” says the Lord. “Look, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel! 7The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, 8if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. 9And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, 10if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will relent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it.
Note that it is “the instant ” following a nation’s probationary period that God speaks His judgment or blessing. It is not upon every instant that God says that He cannot be resisted. Furthermore, even in divine judgment God’s irresistibility does not negate whatever a man’s or nation’s intentions (choices) might be, but merely the effects of such intentions.
Jeremiah was an empathetic prophet, and though not personally culpable in the sense that other individuals were (who because of their acts, made divine judgment on Israel a necessity), nevertheless identifies himself with his nation. Thus at the beginning of Lamentations 3 Jeremiah is a witness to God’s judgment. “I am the man who hath seen affliction by the rod of his wrath.” Thus, after describing God’s judgment upon Jerusalem in the book’s two previous chapters, he comes in chapter 3 to personalize Jerusalem’s desperate situation, seeing in it something of his own position. For he describes the affliction which he bore as the Lord’s prophet and, in effect, mediator, stating the he was derided by the people and their (mocking) song all the day. In another place he states “we have transgressed,” thus identifying himself with his nation. In the former sense his statements appear to be Job-like in their pathos, yet Messianic insofar that the sufferer feels estranged from God because of his identity with his people. As chapter 3 progresses Jeremiah says he is hedged in by God’s judgment, but he later reflects on how his own deserving misery has had a humbling effect. Thus, he hopes that his contrite spirit might find eventual relief, since God is a God of mercy. Let us note the actual context of Lamentations 3:37-38 by reading verses 19-40:
19Remembering mine affliction and my misery, the wormwood and the gall. 20My soul hath them still in remembrance, and is humbled in me. 21This I recall to my mind, therefore have I hope. 22It is of the Lord’s mercies that we are not consumed, because his compassions fail not. 23They are new every morning: great is thy faithfulness. 24The Lord is my portion, saith my soul; therefore will I hope in him. 25The Lord is good unto them that wait for him, to the soul that seeketh him. 26It is good that a man should both hope and quietly wait for the salvation of the Lord. 27It is good for a man that he bear the yoke in his youth. 28He sitteth alone and keepeth silence, because he hath borne it upon him. 29He putteth his mouth in the dust; if so be there may be hope. 30He giveth his cheek to him that smiteth him: he is filled full with reproach. 31For the Lord will not cast off for ever: 32But though he cause grief, yet will he have compassion according to the multitude of his mercies. 33For he doth not afflict willingly nor grieve the children of men. 34To crush under his feet all the prisoners of the earth, 35To turn aside the right of a man before the face of the most High, 36To subvert a man in his cause, the Lord approveth not. 37Who is he that saith, and it cometh to pass, when the Lord commandeth it not? 38Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good? 39Wherefore doth a living man complain, a man for the punishment of his sins? 40Let us search and try our ways, and turn again to the Lord.
The term evil has been changed in most modern translations, since the Hebrew word in this context of judgment is better translated ‘calamity’ (as rendered by the NAS and NIV). The preference for ‘evil’ instead of ‘destruction’ by the KJV, however, is just another example of how a translation can influence Christians for centuries to think that sin itself is somehow comprehended within God (i.e., that even evil comes forth from the Most High). Of particular note in the above passage is the thought that follows verses 37-38. Observe that the word commandeth in verse 37 specifically refers to the word punishment in verse 39. Thus, what God is commanding is His punishment, i.e., not the thoughts and intents of men’s souls as Bridges (and other Calvinists) would like us to believe. In fact, the entire the chapter that surrounds verses 37-38 is chiefly about God’s authority to judge an unrepentant people, that is, if God’s merciful program during their probation has been ignored.
Of course, the reason for God’s judgment was in large part due to the false prophets of Judah and Jerusalem. It was they who encouraged Israel’s rebellion against God and continued to speak deceptions to the inhabitants of Jerusalem during the siege of the city. Jeremiah would later recall their activity in Lamentations 2:14: “Thy prophets have seen vain and foolish things for thee: and they have not discovered thine iniquity, to turn away thy captivity; but have seen for thee false burdens and causes of banishment.” Jeremiah himself had asked King Zedekiah during the final stage of the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem: “Where are now your prophets who prophesied unto you, saying, The king of Babylon shall not come against you, nor against this land?” (Jer. 37:19). These false prophets had ignored the warnings of God in Deuteronomy about how continued sinfulness would result in Israel’s exile from the land. When the exile became immanent these prophets hid themselves, for they were powerless to prevent God’s decreed hour of judgment. Thus, when Jeremiah writes in Lamentations 3:37: “Who is he that saith, and it cometh to pass, when the Lord commandeth it not?,” this verse, when understood in its proper context, is a rhetorical question about who can resist the instances of God’s judgments following probationary periods. The false prophets had promised one thing (blessing), but God declared another result (judgment) because of the people’s sin. And only the latter of these would prove irresistible. Thus, the immediate specific context is about the judgment of Jerusalem and Judah. And if verses 37-38 are intended to be applied beyond their immediate context, the responsible Bible student is still obligated to understand these verses in a context of betimes divine judgment, for that is what the Lamentations 3 passage and the book of Lamentations primarily addresses. God’s decrees, then, which are said to be irresistible, are those instances of judgment which affect men and nations in history. They are not, as Bridges implies, God’s foreordination of every iota that men write down in the pages of their histories both individually and corporately, i.e. God’s making of all history. The context of Lamentations simply does not bear out such an interpretation. Thus Bridges can only use verses 37-38 to serve his theology by quoting them out of context.
To thus read into verses 37-38 something far different, such as the idea that God makes every decision of man, is an irresponsible use of Scripture. Imagine, for example, what havoc would result if someone took verse 31 out of its context. It reads: “For the Lord will not cast off for ever.” One could form an entire doctrine of purgatory or universalism by interpreting other verses to say that God inevitably abates His anger. One could state, for example, that even as God’s judgment upon Jerusalem was eventually mollified by the returning remnant to the land of Judah 70 years later, even so do we have a biblical picture that, as Revelation says, “He (God) makes all things new.” Following this we might quote Psalm 103:9: “He will not always strive with us, Nor will He keep His anger forever.” One could then add the idea that eternal punishment is a monstrous one, especially as the Christian comes to a better understanding of Jesus’ message of forgiveness. That’s what one could do if one took Lamentations 3:31, Revelation 21:5, and Psalm 103:9 out of their contexts and added some feel-good statements about Jesus and forgiveness. To ensure such a view, one could then read false definitions into every other Bible verse and passage that would seem to oppose it. Every cult uses such a method. Calvinism uses such a method also. That’s how these systems of thought remain consistent and fool people. Indeed, in such a process the uninitiated often feels intimidated and stupid, supposing he knows so much less than he thought. After all, the person trying to convert them seems to have thoughtful, consistent answers for everything.
How can we Christians (and especially the true apologist) combat such renegade interpretations? By looking around at the verses and chapters that surround the verse in question (i.e., specific, or near context), as well as understanding the message of the Bible as a whole (i.e., general, or far context). To see, then, Lamentations 3:31 (”For the Lord will not cast off for ever”)in relation to other contexts is to understand that this verse refers specifically to Jerusalem’s eventual restoration, and generally to the principle that God’s mercy is eternally upon the living who repent of their sins. Failing to contextualize Scripture is an incredibly powerful tool of the Enemy, and Christians ought to have nothing to do with it. Indeed, when Satan tried to convince Jesus that He ought to have enough trust in God to cast Himself off the tower of the Temple, he did this not only by omitting part of Psalm 91:11a-12, but also by taking the Old Testament passage out of context. [The Devil stated: “If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone” (Mt. 4:6)]. Let us, then, leave the job of acontextualizing the Bible to the Devil. Whenever Christians employ the same methodology it merely promotes unbiblical ideas and a theology of error.
xxix Bridges pp. 18-19.
xxx Bridges, pp. 24-25.
xxxi Bridges, p. 76.